"What do you call a Pakistani cloakroom attendant? Mahatma coat."

So said Sir David Jason on a radio broadcast on Tuesday, sparking no complaints and a media outrage. I would have thought that accusations of racism would require, at the very least, something racist to have been said. Mentioning race is not the same thing. The idea that this portrays Pakistanis as cloakroom assistants, a sentence I struggle to believe I have just typed, is sort of ridiculous. This accusation was made Mr Mohammed Shafiq of the Ramadhan Foundation, a man who is in a position to help everyone understand better the delicate issues surrounding our multicutural society, should be ashamed for coming out with such mindless nonsense.

Now, if the joke had been, "What do you call a cloakroom attendant? Mahatma coat," then we'd be getting closer (similar alternatives would have included "What do you call a cloakroom attendant? A Pakistani"). I will concede that this joke does portray Pakistanis as being called Mahatma. This is obviously not true, and should be addressed. I know one called Rinchan.

But here is the best bit - "We consider the views of our listeners to be very important and have received no complaints about these comments. Christian O'Connell will issue an on-air apology in tomorrow's breakfast show." So important are the views of these listeners to Absolute Radio, that they have decided to ignore the sentiments they have conveyed, and do exactly what they want anyway. When dealing with something as complicated and nuanced as race relations, I find its always better to respond with crude, blunt jabs of blanket denial and patronising posturing. Everyone out of the pool, please - last one in is a racist.

God, I love Stewart Lee. I will refuse to accept that there is a better comedian on the planet today. There may be funnier comedians, measured by a crude laughs-elicited-per-half-hour metric, but no-one crafts jokes like Lee. No-one has the same gift for language, for hypnotic delivery, and no-one is as relentless as he is in picking a target and demolishing it. His new show is on iPlayer now, and on Mondays at 10pm on BBC2 for the next four weeks.

On another note, the BBC had a piece today about why RPI inflation had fallen to zero, but CPI inflation had surprisingly risen. Both measure the cost of living and the change in prices for a "basket" of goods. However, the composition of the RPI basket includes housing cost, including mortgage repayments, which have obviously shrunk in recent months as interest rates have plummeted. The thing that amused me was the top three reasons for rising prices in the CPI:

1. Falling exchange rates making imported food and other products more expensive.

2. Shops reverting back prices prior to VAT rate decrease last December.

3. Poor harvest in Spain leading to increase in cucumber and courgette prices.

Wait, did we shift to a salad vegetable based economy whilst I wasn't looking? Are there people struggling with energy bills this month because their courgette expenses have rocketed? Maybe I'll just have a zucchini instead. But wait - it's the SAME THING! There's no way out!

Away for a few days from tomorrow, as we (me and Cath and Cath's mum and Cath's dad) are heading to Ghent, Bruges and Antwerp. Will be nice.

Interesting stuff on homophobia on TV and its increasing (or perhaps continual) acceptibility, after two sketches on Al Murray's and Horne and Corden's new shows. I watched the latter - it's not good, but the panning it received this morning was a bit much. It's no worse than most tepid TV comedy, and James Corden did do a pretty decent Ricky Gervais/David Brent impression in Karate Kid 14.

In the aftermath of Sunday's performance of Correctness, I've been thinking (and Andy and I have been discussing) what happens next. I like sketch, and it is pretty much my ideal medium, so it's interesting to see what opportunities there would be. Sketch nights in London and festivals - though sadly not Edinburgh, this year - are on the radar.

In that vein, two articles, published independently but about the same topic, appeared in the Guardian and the Independent today. Interesting, the former seems to believe sketch shows no longer have any appeal, while the latter seems really excited about the blossoming live sketch scene in London. Let's assume the latter is true.

Anyway, I started having a look at some of the sketches and sketch groups who are on Youtube, and while there are a great many that I liked, here's my favourite: Women, by Idiots of Ants.

Painfully funny, from the Daily Show last week.

Now, of course, I deeply want to see this play. I am often quite cynical of the "offensive comedy is satire" defence, because it's used so often, for things with no satirical target or purpose other than to shock. However, when done well (Chris Morris, Bill Hicks) it is also the most rewarding form of comedy - the ability to entertain while at the same time provoking actual thoughts about the attitudes you have and the undiscovered hypocrisies you carry around is an impressive skill.

But I'm inclined to give this play the benefit of the doubt, if only because this part of the linked news piece annoyed me:

"The play has received a mixed response from critics.

The Sunday Times found it "a seriously hilarious play", "provocative, swaggering, humane and edgy".

Shadow Children's Secretary Michael Gove said he was surprised the "dramatically appalling" work could be staged in the National Theatre.

"I thought that the humour was vulgar, raucous, obvious. It made Alf Garnett seem sophisticated," he told BBC Two's Newsnight Review."

Firstly, the positive opinion was from a critic. The negative opinion was from a politician. A politician has politicised public opinions. The reason for that is that the headline 'Top Tory supports racist play" carries more weight than whatever well thought out argument that led to it. Quite why we expect our politicians to have opinions on culture issues and celebrity news is beyond me. Maybe we don't. Maybe it's a media construction. But Gordon Brown volunteered his thoughts on Jade Goody's cancer. Why? Who knows. As prime minister, he should have no opinion on any one cancer patient. As a human being he should and likely does, but he only has a voice as a public figure, so it's entirely irrelevant what he thinks.

Secondly, Alf Garnett WAS sophisticated, and the fact that people continue to miss that fact is a constant source of upset. I had a conversation with my Dad recently about 1970s TV, and he said that there's no way Alf Garnett would be allowed on TV today. But of course it could, because it was sending up bigotry, rather than expressing bigoted views in a heartfelt way. Do try to pay attention.